Patna High Court
Suresh dasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
The appellants, a group of brothers and relatives, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act for alleged assault, robbery and other offences on 15 August 2024. They applied for anticipatory bail, which was denied by the Exclusive Special Judge, prompting an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellants argued that the FIR was vague, contained ornamental allegations, and that they were falsely implicated by the informant. The State and the informant opposed the bail, contending that the allegations, if true, justified denial of bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, held that the lower court’s order refusing anticipatory bail was unsustainable and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., setting aside the impugned order.
Issues considered
- The propriety of refusing anticipatory bail to the appellants under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the FIR and the allegations therein are sufficient to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Applicability of Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- FIR
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- offences under B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5320 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-543 Year-2024 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran
======================================================
1. Suresh Das, S/o Tilak Das, R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
2. Jay Ram Das, S/o Tilak Das, R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
3. Bachcha Das, S/o Tilak Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
4. Awadhesh Das S/o Tilak Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
5. Mukha Das @ Ranjid Das @ Ranjit Kumar @ Mukha S/o Awadhesh Das
R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @ Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
6. Gulabi Devi W/o Awadhesh Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
7. Shanti Devi, W/o Ravi Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
8. Mira Devi, W/o Bachcha Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
9. Nilam Devi, W/o Uma Shankar Das @ Uma Das R/o vill - Lakhanpur, P.S. -
Maskrakh @ Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ram Vichar Ram, S/o Bhola Ram, R/o vill. - Lakhanpur, P.S. - Maskrakh @
Mashrak, Distt.- Saran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Rajani Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Nandita Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5320 of 2024(4) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 28.10.2024 in A.B.P. No. 3484 of 2024 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Chapra,
Saran, in connection with Mashrak P.S. Case No. 543 of 2024
registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 329(3), 329(4),
324(2), 74, 352, 351(2), 61(2), 303(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. as well
as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants have antecedent of one case
but then final form was submitted by the police after
investigation and appellant nos. 6 to 9 are criminals and the
informant alleges that the appellants on 15.08.2024 along with
their family members came and started abusing and left after
threatening, thereafter, again on the same day the appellants
came at 12.00 midnight and started assaulting and when his wife
came to save him Suresh Das started strangulating her while
Bachcha Das was firing in the air and they fled with box
containing Rs. 20,000/- and jewellery.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5320 of 2024(4) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
informant. Learned counsel next submitted that from perusal of
the allegations as alleged in the FIR it would manifest that no
reason assigned for the occurrence has happened. It is further
submitted that allegations are in two parts in the first part it is
alleged that appellants came on 15.08.2024 and started abusing
and left after threatening and thereafter on the same day again
they came at 12.00 pm midnight and abused and Suresh Das
tried to strangulate his wife while Bachcha Das was firing and
the accused appellants took away a box containing Rs. 20,000/-
and jewellery. It is further submitted that the entire family
members have been implicated with general and omnibus
allegation. It is next submitted that even what kind of abuse was
hurled is not alleged in the FIR and allegation of strangulating
the wife of the informant and firing in the air is ornamental. It is
further submitted that FIR has not been instituted under the
Arms Act nor any empty cartridges were recovered from the
place of occurrence and allegation of fleeing away with box is
ornamental. It is also submitted that even presuming what has
been alleged is true without admitting then the entire occurrence
took place at the house of the informant and thus was not in
public view nor the FIR even remotely suggests that the
occurrence was witnessed by any independent witness.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5320 of 2024(4) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions, let the appellants,
above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid
case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…